Barry

Thanks for the kudos. If I sounded pessimistic I didn't intend to. I am generally optimistic about this group but just wanted to note the concerns. I think what's different about this draft is that in the past we were worried about whether a player's ability would translate to the pros. With this draft I don't think many people question the talent is there at the pro level. It's just making sure that it fits the scheme as well it seems it will.

I think one of the ways this draft stands out is that players were chosen if they fit the system, almost to a total disregard of the weaknesses they had in other areas. In any draft, with almost every player, you obviously have their strengths and weaknesses. But it seems the gulf between the strengths and weaknesses with some of the players we took are a lot larger than the 'average' selection. The 'glass is half-full' crowd, like Pluto, says we had alignment in values, a plan, and stuck with it, etc. The flip side of that is that, in our system, one hopes that we are able to hide the deficiencies of the players we chose. Of course every team tries to do that but it may be that we will need to do that more than the average team: Wills- Thought by many to be the best OT prospect available. We depended on Callahan a lot, according to Pluto, in getting info as to how easy it would be to have him change sides. While Callahan has done it with a player before, the fact remains that not many tackles have switched sides in the pros. He fits our system, but this is not a 'plug-and-play' situation, and there is considerable risk here. Delpit- Maybe the best example. His coverage and center field skills are extraordinary. His tackling is horrendous, minus a small stretch of playoff games. What that means is that every time we see him in a one-on-one tackling situation we will be holding our breath, until he proves otherwise. This is a high risk, high reward situation. But it is not the same high risk, high reward like you see when you choose a player in an early round whom you see has great potential if you can teach him (JaMarcus Russell being one of the best and most well-known example). Delpit is a guy who fits the system of pass defense but once you get outside that area there is a big gulf. Harris doesn't have the extreme polar situations which Wills and Delpit potentially have, but it can reasonably be said, imo, that if the Browns didn't have a zone blocking scheme as their system, that Harris would have been a poor pick, as his key attributes are attributed mostly to his ability to play in a zone blocking scheme. It has been said that the Bryant pick was a bit of a surprise, and that if we weren't planning to run a 2 (or 3) TE set much of the time, that he wouldn't have been selected. That seems pretty obvious as his main skill is running routes and catching the ball. He isn't going to be put in to block or provide run support. He might fall into a more typical 'strengths and weaknesses' profile. Teams choose players who fit their system. That's nothing new. We chose a few players, though, that are almost two different players in one. Right now, before any of theses guys play, we can congratulate the Browns for having a coordinated plan and sticking to it. Compared to past drafts, that alone is cause for celebration. And if their plan works, then we can really congratulate them.

Well, you're half right anyways....

Was the financing for upgrades or a new stadium? Did it pass? Was that partially responsible for SD losing its team? There was virtually no way a stadium could have been built in the Bay Area using public funds when Santa Clara was built. Soon after the Montana-Young dynasty DeBartolo wanted to rebuild a stadium on the old Candlestick spot (which is horrendous). It was surrounded by a lot of low-income properties, and even though the 49ers were beloved in the Bay Area, had just won a bunch of Super Bowls, and DeBartolo promised to rebuild the area surrounding Candlestick into decent housing, stores, etc. it didn't pass.

Niners' stadium was not publicly financed technically, though Santa Clara potentially could have been responsible for payments if certain flows of revenue failed to materialize.

And don't forget the Goodtime II and submarine!

My father was best friends with Capt Frank. I visited his house and restaurant all the time. Remember the custard stand in the back? 😀

There is one issue being discussed, and that is whether ‘everybody’ considers Nick Foles a starting Qb. Here are his stats. Feel free to look them up. I did. He has been a designated back-up Qb for 71 games. He has been a starter due to the injury of the Qb playing ahead of him 18 games, and he has been the designated starter in 21 games. Now there is grey area here, small as it may be. For example, could Vick have come back after 2-3 weeks from a concussion if Noles had been playing poorly? We will never know. But even if you grant that possibility it doesn’t change the facts a hell of a lot. Excluding injuries which have forced him to start, Nick Foles has been a designated back-up 77% of his games for his career. He has also been traded or released 4 times. He is also listed as the 2nd Qb behind Mitch Trubisky, recognized by many as one of the worse starting Qbs in the league. I will grant you that Nick Foles has been unbelievable at times. But it is his inconsistency which has always driven him back to being what he has been more than ¾ of his career. Far from ‘everyone’ thinking he is a starting Qb, ask yourself if he is that good consistently why has he been traded or released 4 times and why are more than 75% of his games is he sitting on the bench? You think maybe 'everybody' doesn't think he is a starter?

You are playing loose with words there Gipper. Super Bowl winning Qb is not a Super Bowl MVP caliBER Qb, at least not in my book. Joe Flacco, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Doug Williams, Nick Foles...the list does not stop there. Those are SB winning Qbs but they are not SB calibre Qbs. I define the latter as franchise Qbs who can consistently give a team outstanding Qb play and winning football. And is strange that if 'everyone' (really?) considered him a long-term starting Qb there has been few times where teams have decided to go with him (outside of injury to others), to lead their team into the season. No, in spite of your insistence I am going to stick to my guns on this one.

Nick Foles has never played more than half a season 6 out of 8 seasons. He is currently listed as Trubisky's back-up. Two years ago the Bears won 12 games and Trubisky sucks. No, I don't call that a play for a starting calibre Qb.

This, plus the fact that it is a buyer's market right now. On a related note, it's surprising that Chicago hasn't made a play for any Qb yet.

With Steph running a lot of 2 TE sets I see less of a need of a Duvernay type of receiver.

I'm not either. He has soft hands and even pulls in some nice ones in a crowd, but he is 1-dimensional. Doesn't show himself to be physically dominating one bit. That isn't to say he won't be fine the way Steph plans to use him. I just don't envision him ever becoming more than a nice 2nd or 3rd pass option.

Higgins went weeks where there was no report of Berry, Steph et al showing interest in re-signing him, and I never heard that there was a problem with $ that was keeping them apart in negotiations. Yet it seems that this FO was cool to him also. It seems that it might have been something that went up as far as Haslam in terms of something he did which has caused 2 FO's to cool their jets with him. And the fact that it has never leaked kind of confirms its seriousness and was more than just pissing off Freddie.

They must have read my mentioning him yesterday and knew I was pissed off about him not being signed yet. 😉

Don't get me started with the data and testing and 'accurate' figures, etc. It's a joke. A lot of the figures have been built on a house of cards. But you can get a rough idea from working backwards. For example, of the people you know who got it, what percentage required hospitalization, how old were they, etc. But as far as total numbers you are absolutely right. We will never know most likely.

My son also think he got it. He had all the symptoms in January and was bad for about a week. Being 26 he didn't get serious and was able to stay in his apartment in LA. SincE then we have read that it is quite possible that one of the reasons California seemed to handle the virus well, in addition to early shelter, was because it was in LA and SF as early as late '19 and many people built up the antibodies for it. We think that's what happened with my son. Wouldn't doubt that your daughter and her husband got it.

We are being told in the SF Bay Area to expect shelter-in-place thru the end of May. At that time they will decide based upon what the numbers look like.

Which is what was amazing about Josh Gordon. The guy had both long strides and was quick with them. If you look closely at his breaks he could break a defender's ankles by using his long strides, he didn't have to take shorter, quick steps to change direction.

This is what concerns me the most. You can teach a guy to run better routes and maybe show him some technical things to beat a press cover or to help him potentially get open. But if a guy can't fake out a defender I have never heard of that skill-set being taught so that he suddenly learns how to do it. If the quickness (as opposed to speed) and twitch isn't there it ain't going to grow on him. That isn't to say he won't be a good 3rd receiver. He reminds me in a way of Antonio Callaway. I thought Callaway's twitch and ability to get a step through deception was bad. But his speed was very good and, importantly, his quickness, was very good. I could be wrong but I don't see quickness in DP-J's route-running, and the analysis confirms this. But where he will be better than Callaway is his size and his ability to fight and come down with the ball, which is fantastic. So he will be a capable 3rd receiver, imo. Which brings up a question. Has anyone heard what the hell Higgins did that put him in 2 Browns' FO doghouses?

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/drinking-the-kool-aid-a-survivor-remembers-jim-jones/248723/

Just don't drink his kool-aid (bad joke if you remember only if you are old like me)

Yep. With all the analysis, gut feelings, film, etc involved you'd think that people would have a good handle on it. Yet we consider someone very successful if they have a 50% hit rate. Not the kind of stats I'd want when getting on a plane.

Two points from the above: It's too bad that the marriage of analytic evaluation and the 'football player' is personality-driven, and that there isn't really a way to make it structural (with Dorsey being the proof). That's why it is so important that once you get a successful FO team you do everything you can to keep it together. Best way is for the FO to keep bringing in guys they like and promoting them once they prove themselves. Second, a little off-the-point but I was reading a book about U.S. diplomacy and the author pointed out that, strangely, the U.S. diplomatic corps does not have a mechanism where they self-evaluate and analyze their mistakes in negotiations with other countries. At least in a formalized way. It's a bit unbelievable if you think about it. It sounds like PFF (and probably many football operations) might suffer from the same failure. Do they go back and ask why did we grade a guy this way and where did we fail to see his upside (or downside)? I would think that that would help them a lot, and it would certainly be an interesting article if they were to publicize it, though it may be giving away too many corporate secrets.

I'm far more worried about the Ravens than Steelers. I see the Steelers in denial. They think they can compete for a title still but that window has closed, and their drafting style is a bit out-dated, imo. But that doesn't mean they still can't recognize good defensive players. But they didn't improve their receivers this draft that much at all and when, not if, Ben goes down, they have Rudolph backing him up.